캐나다ㆍ미국ㆍ한국의 헌법재판기준에 관한 비교법적 연구 = A Comparative Legal Study on Judicial Review Standards of Canada, U.S. and Korea

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

  Historically Canada had been a member of United Kingdom and had unwritten constitution like England. Canadian Supreme Court has had a power of judicial review like the U. S. Supreme Court.<BR>  Canadian Supreme Court applied so variable standards including Object standard. to review a statute"s ordaining purpose. According to typical review standards of Canada, the court could have made a role to prepare public forum for social or hot issue. So I think it is typical point.<BR>  In contrast. the U. S. Supreme Court"s standards had been so variable and tiny things themselves. At first glance, that looks like it is never comfortable and understandable to find out. which puzzled many scholars and judges.<BR>  Nonetheless U. S. Supreme Court"s Standards are one of meaningful and convincing principles from time to time known as scrutinies.<BR>  Above all, the Korean Constitutional Court"s standards had been known so base-weakened scrutinies. which proved it"s own principles. According to contextual strict scrutiny. when came difficulties to do comparative analysis. unhopefully there were ups and downs to establish review standards of Korean style. but now it will be teaching point to construct its own constitutional interpretation methodology and go over next step, will adapt variable standards to real trial.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
  Ⅱ. 캐나다 연방대법원의 사법심시기준
  Ⅲ. 미국 연방대법원의 사법심사 기준
  Ⅳ. 한국 헌법재판소의 위헌심사기준 문제
  Ⅴ. 결론
  [Abstract]